You are here:

If There’s TPACK, is There Technological Pedagogical Reasoning and Action?
PROCEEDING

, William & Mary School of Education, United States ; , Faculty of Education, Monash University, Australia

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Washington, D.C., United States ISBN 978-1-939797-32-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

The notion of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) was modified by multiple authors to become technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK or TPACK), spawning much active and dynamic scholarship since 2001. Currently, many researchers see TPCK/TPACK as the knowledge that teachers need to integrate technologies effectively into learning and teaching. Shulman’s PCK, however, was just one element in a much larger conceptualization of a knowledge base for educators, and that full range of knowledge was posited as being used by teachers in recursive processes of pedagogical reasoning and action. This begs the question: if there is TPCK/TPACK, which is rooted in PCK, as many studies have suggested, is there also technological pedagogical reasoning and action (TPR&A)? If so, what are its distinguishing characteristics? If not, why would TPCK not be mirrored in TPR&A? These questions are addressed in the following multivocal literature review.

Citation

Harris, J. & Phillips, M. (2018). If There’s TPACK, is There Technological Pedagogical Reasoning and Action?. In E. Langran & J. Borup (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2051-2061). Washington, D.C., United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 16, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers as information and communication technology designers: An instructional systems design model based on an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 292-302.
  2. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK). Computers& Education, 52(1), 154-168.
  3. Borko, H., Roberts, S.A., & Shavelson, R. (2008). Teachers' decision making: From Alan J. Bishop to today. In P. Clarkson& N. Presmeg (Eds.), Critical issues in mathematics education: Major contributions of Alan Bishop (pp. 37-67).
  4. Bruce, B.C., & Hogan, M.C. (1998). The disappearance of technology: Toward an ecological model of literacy. In D. Reinking, M. McKenna, L. Labbo, & R. Kieffer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world (pp. 269-281). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  5. Cox, S. (2008). A conceptual analysis of technological pedagogical content knowledge (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2481 & Context=etd
  6. Cox, S., & Graham, C.R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in practice: using an elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5), 60-69.
  7. Feng, Y. & Hew, K. (2005). K-12 teachers’ pedagogical reasoning in planning instruction with technology integration. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber& D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2005— Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3173-3180). Chesapeake,
  8. Fenstermacher, G.D. (1986). Philosophy of research on teaching: Three aspects. In L.S. Shulman (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (Vol. 3, pp. 37-49). Itasca, IL: Peacock.
  9. Fenstermacher, G.D. (1994). The knower and the known: The nature of knowledge in research on teaching. Review of Research in Education, 20(1), 3-56.
  10. Fielding, M. (2011). Patterns of partnership: Student voice, intergenerational learning and democratic fellowship. In N. Mockler & J. Sachs (Eds.), Rethinking educational practice through reflexive inquiry (pp. 61-75). New York:
  11. Green, T.F. (1971). The activities of teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  12. Harris, J., Phillips, M., Koehler, M., & Rosenberg, J. (2017). TPCK/TPACK research and development: Past, present and future directions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), i-viii.
  13. Koehler, M.J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2004, April). Content, pedagogy, and technology: Testing a model of technology integration. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. Retrieved from http://www.matt-koehler.com/publications/Koehler_et_al_AERA_2004.pdf
  14. Loughran, J. (2013). Pedagogy: Making sense of the complex relationship between teaching and learning. Curriculum Inquiry, 43(1), 118-141.
  15. Loveless, A. (2011). Technology, pedagogy and education: Reflections on the accomplishment of what teachers know, do and believe in a digital age. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20(3), 301-316.
  16. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. Doi:10.1111/J.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  17. Mishra, P., Koehler, M.J., & Kereluik, K. (2009). The song remains the same: Looking back to the future of educational technology. TechTrends, 53(5), 48-53.
  18. Morine-Dershimer, G., & Kent, T. (1999). The complex nature and sources of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge. In J. GessNewsome & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 21-50). Dordrecht, The
  19. Niess, M.L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509-523.
  20. Niess, M., & Gillow-Wiles, H. (2017). Expanding teachers’ technological pedagogical reasoning with a systems pedagogical approach. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(3), 77-95. Doi:10.14742/ajet.3473
  21. Papert, S. (1987). Computer criticism vs. Technocentric thinking. , 16(1), 22-30.
  22. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York, NY: Basic Books.
  23. Pierson, M.E. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413-430. Doi:10.1080/08886504.2001.10782325
  24. Richardson, K.W. (2009). Looking at/looking through: Teachers planning for curriculum-based learning with technology (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3371354)
  25. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
  26. Smart, V.L. (2016). Technological pedagogical reasoning: The development of teachers' pedagogical reasoning with technology over multiple career stages (Doctoral thesis, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia). Retrieved from https://www120.secure.griffith.edu.au/rch/items/b658444f-8e00-4c61-9b95-a3b19c62d545/1/
  27. Smart, V., Finger, G., & Sim, C. (2016). Developing TPACK: Envisioning technological pedagogical reasoning. In M.C. Herring, M.J. Koehler, & P. Mishra (Eds.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for educators (2nd ed., pp. 53–62). New York: Routledge.
  28. Smart, V., Sim, C., & Finger, G. (2015, March). Are teachers lost in thought with technology? Moving from pedagogical reasoning to technological pedagogical reasoning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education, Las Vegas, NV.
  29. Starkey, L. (2010). Teachers' pedagogical reasoning and action in the digital age. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 16(2), 233-244. Doi:10.1080/13540600903478433
  30. Starkey, L. (2012). Teaching and learning in the digital age. New York: Routledge.
  31. Webb, M. (2011). Changing models for researching pedagogy with information and communication technologies. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 29(1), 53-67.
  32. Webb, M. (2014). Pedagogy with information and communications technologies in transition. Education and Information Technologies, 19(2), 275-294. Doi:10.1007/s10639-012-9216-x
  33. Webb, M., & Cox, M. (2004). A review of pedagogy related to information and communications technology. Technology, Pedagogy, and Education, 13(3), 235-286. Doi:10.1080/14759390400200183
  34. Willermark, S. (2017). Technological pedagogical and content knowledge: A review of empirical studies published from 2011 to 2016. Journal of Educational Computing Research. Advance online publication.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. PCK and TPCK/TPACK: More than Etiology

    Michael Phillips, Faculty of Education, Monash University, Australia; Judi Harris, William & Mary School of Education, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2018 (Mar 26, 2018) pp. 2109–2116

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.